ReverendDexter wrote: Though, the only '00 Cobras are the 5.4L Cobra R, and the only '02s were Australia-only RHD export cars.
Notice why I skipped the few years....
In reply to Apexcarver:
The Mach was a bit of a monster in its own way....didn't they use navigator cams in them?
Not really sure, I stopped obsessing over mustangs about when those came out. I think only the intake side though.
I thought Mach 1s used the same cams/heads as the Terminators.
ReverendDexter wrote:Sky_Render wrote: Personally, I like them because they make the front end feel more "solid," which improves my confidence in the vehicle and makes me push it harder.I'm curious if you could actually feel the difference in how "solid" the car feels with and without an STB in a double-blind test.
I wonder about that too. But if he can actually feel the difference, then it has to be having some effect.
The reason I asked you to elaborate on the STB is that old Mustang's like mine do transfer load into the shock towers, so it's very important to have a triangulated shock tower brace. I know that in general even later Mustangs don't have the stiffest structures, but aren't familiar enough with them to know specifics. Thanks for the explanation.
bravenrace wrote:ReverendDexter wrote:I wonder about that too. But if he can actually feel the difference, then it has to be having some effect. The reason I asked you to elaborate on the STB is that old Mustang's like mine do transfer load into the shock towers, so it's very important to have a triangulated shock tower brace. I know that in general even later Mustangs don't have the stiffest structures, but aren't familiar enough with them to know specifics. Thanks for the explanation.Sky_Render wrote: Personally, I like them because they make the front end feel more "solid," which improves my confidence in the vehicle and makes me push it harder.I'm curious if you could actually feel the difference in how "solid" the car feels with and without an STB in a double-blind test.
I think that's why he says a double-blind test. If you know it's there I think there is a bit of a placebo effect.
On my old E30 with 750/550 coilovers and sticky tires(and I have to assume a far floppier chassis than a 11+ S197, I could tell no difference between strut bar and no strut bar.
Doesn't matter if it's a placebo effect. If it makes the driver feel more confident in the car and thus drive faster, then the mod makes the car faster.
In reply to Sky_Render:
Yup.
Do keep in mind, with the modified mac-p front suspension on an SN-95 the springs don't transfer loads directly to the towers. That said, you may get some more rigidity because the STB is boxing and triangulating (depending on reference angle) the front of the chassis.
That said, one that doesn't connect to the firewall isnt going to do squat in cornering. You are just tieing one flexing piece to another.
My feeling is that they are primarily a reduction in NVH, not in the sense of reducing deflection to make the car faster enough to offset their weight.
SN95's need all the weight off the nose you can skim. My cobra? 59.1% front weight. (need to work on that...)
At the end of the day, if you drive around the psychology of it the STB-less car will be faster from the weight reduction. (at least thats my opinion)
Apexcarver wrote: My feeling is that they are primarily a reduction in NVH, not in the sense of reducing deflection to make the car faster enough to offset their weight.
I agree with this. A reduction in NVH makes the front of the car feel more "solid," which, in turn, inspires more confidence in the driver.
Installing the STB on my S197 did jack squat for cornering. It did, however, make the car feel more solid through the duration of a corner and over bumps.
Consider, though, that track-pack Mustangs come equipped with STBs from the factory. An engineer somewhere must have thought they mattered enough to convince the bean-counters to put them in...
Its more entertaining to pick the inside wheel off the ground autoxing an E36 anyways......
STBs help pending the car......thats about the jist of what my comments in here are about.......the original stangs had export braces, so meh 
Sky_Render wrote: Consider, though, that track-pack Mustangs come equipped with STBs from the factory. An engineer somewhere must have thought they mattered enough to convince the bean-counters to put them in...
Good to know, mine should be here in 6-8 weeks. 
Not going to argue that point, as I said, my 97 Cobra came with a triangulated brace from the factory. Some engineer was able to justify the ~$20 expense to a Ford beancounter. (although, telling that the beancounter won and it was removed for 1998)
I leave mine on because less fatigue on the chassis is a good thing in my book.
One thing that these cars really benefit from (probably more than from a STB) is subframe connectors. I need to review ESP rules and get some on mine at some juncture down the road. Again, telling that they were added to convertables. (cannot remember if that was a TSB or from factory, IIRC it was a TSB item for cowl shake)
Always remember. Mustangs from 1979-2004 share the same basic chassis. It did get some improvements, but only band-aids and changes, not a redesign. That chassis is the same as a 1978 Ford Fairmont.
Sky_Render wrote:Apexcarver wrote: My feeling is that they are primarily a reduction in NVH, not in the sense of reducing deflection to make the car faster enough to offset their weight.I agree with this. A reduction in NVH makes the front of the car feel more "solid," which, in turn, inspires more confidence in the driver. Installing the STB on my S197 did jack squat for cornering. It did, however, make the car feel more solid through the duration of a corner and over bumps. Consider, though, that track-pack Mustangs come equipped with STBs from the factory. An engineer somewhere must have thought they mattered enough to convince the bean-counters to put them in...
Or that the marketing people made the engineers put them on because it was a low cost part that enthusiast types would buy into. Could have gone either way.
You'll need to log in to post.
